Very nice...
 
 

 
 
 

That would look sound look great between my Rokit 5s.
 
 
 
 
I'm glad to see that someone has addressed the "Fine Fader move" issue with a useful feature.

 
It looks like they've thought of everything doesn't it though Mike.
 
Shows what you can achieve if you design something that addresses the needs of your eventual end-users.

It sure looks nice.  But I'm not completely sold in the idea of touch screens.  I used to use some digital logic analyzers that had touch screens.  Besides cleaning fingerprints off the the screen every five minutes, my chubby, uncoordinated fingers were always causing the wrong setting to change.  Some of it was caused by parallax some was caused by my clumsiness.  I'm sure the technology has evolved, but my clumsiness hasn't.  

I like working in bright cheerful environments.
 
When I see a display monitor sitting at 45* I wonder where the room lighting could be placed so that there isn't an unnerving reflection on the screen.
 
I've tried to place my current monitor like that and I have to turn off most of my lights to make it work... so I went back to a near vertical position.
 
I have also mixed on analog boards long enough to feel as if there is not any need to work hyper fast on a mix. I think the most important thing you can do when you "mix" is to listen rather than to *mix* so the implication that there is a work flow that is even faster than the iconic analog mixing board doesn't seem like a potential benefit that I will appreciate.
 
I really like drawing envelopes and I use very precise near instantaneous, stair stepped, changes in level using to nodes. I rarely use a fade unless I specifically want a fade effect. It's the same way I mix on analog boards. Quick moves on the silence between words or musical phrases.  I think DAWs like to make quick precise changes too. Tapered changes increase CPU and reveal the fragility of the playback engines when the engine encounters lots of unnecessary nodes. The easiest way to get excess nodes is to ride the faders while automaton read is on, so I tend to avoid doing that and prefer to draw in the precise thing I want. I know that seems slow, but I figure it out while I am listening then I quickly make my edits and then I listen some more. If you are *listening* while you are riding the faders you are tempting yourself to hear stuff you aren't really hearing. For example; you might ride the faders 1/2dB and actually think you heard something change. If you think you can hear a 1/2dB change you are hallucinating and anything you can do to prevent inferring that you have, will ultimately make you a more effective listener.
 
I like to make my changes and then listen. We couldn't do that as effectively without automation. We had to deal with moving stuff while it was playing back but now we can avoid that and we can listen with a more open mind. I've been digging that for about 15 years now and think it was great evolutionary improvement.
 
Anyways... I guess I really like the track view paradigm.
 
 
best regards,
mike
 
 
 
 

As myolpal says;
 
Everyone is different, that's what makes a horse race.
 
My last console did not have automation so a mix was done "live" by moving fades, changing EQ and adjusting verb (if necessary) while printing to 2-Track tape.
 
Some days I miss that and others I'm content to work in SONAR's track view. I've said it before, with SONAR, I work exclusively in track view since I my control surface has a bank of 8 faders where I can automate to my hearts content. I just never got behind SONAR's console view (in ANY version).
 
However, I find working in Harrison Mixbus' console view a pleasant experience. And that may be that the track view feels/looks like a stripped down version of SONAR's track view. I imagine they planned it that way.
 
That said, my G.A.S. says get that Raven, but as I open the pocketbook and the moths fly out I realize that is a dream-become-reality for another time. 

mike_mccueTapered changes increase CPU and reveal the fragility of the playback engines when the engine encounters lots of unnecessary nodes.

 
This seems rather unlikely.

drewfx1

mike_mccueTapered changes increase CPU and reveal the fragility of the playback engines when the engine encounters lots of unnecessary nodes.

 
This seems rather unlikely.

But he talks prettier than a $2 hoar, roight?
(please say you understand the Blazing Saddles reference here)

bapuBut he talks prettier than a $2 hoar, roight?
(please say you understand the Blazing Saddles reference here)

Are we accounting for inflation here?

The Bouy Ltd. does all my accounting.
 
Inflation is his middle name.